muscle loss and calorie deficits
Options
Replies
-
My personal experience was a modest deficit but with no lifting, inadequate protein (60-85g daily) and running as my primary activity. Over a 7 month span I lost 20.6 lbs with 16.1 lbs coming from fat and 4.6 lbs coming from lean mass. This was all measured by DEXA as a baseline and then 7 months later. My average daily deficit was calculated to be somewhere around 310 calories. I was disappointed with lean mass loss that high, though I can't confirm some of it wasn't water weight since I think I wasn't in the throes of a cut when I took the baseline. I was lifting and recomping at 2300 calories daily (an even smaller deficit) by the time I did the 2nd one.
That is consistent, though, with the first time I lost weight - 60 lbs over a year and lost roughly 13.5 lbs of LBM.
With inadequate protein and the absence of lifting, I seem to lose about 22.5% from LBM of any given loss. Just anecdotal, but thought it was interesting info.0 -
From my personal experience, readings and discussions, if you train well for a half marathon you will not suffer glycogen depletion even if you take nothing during the run. I have not run a full marathon, but my understanding is that nearly everyone but the elite distance runners will suffer glycogen depletion during a marathon even if they take energy beans/gels during the run. The elite runners may dodge it by a combination of large reserves and efficiency.
My experiences and readings agree with this, though in most cases meaningfull training isn't happening at significant deficits.0 -
damir00: glad I don't do endurance cardio
Where it gets tricky is cal/carb cycling. Having some days of the week at maintenance or surplus and then some larger deficit days has proven anecdotally to work quite well (especially with leaner individuals). If the 31kcal/lb of FM was true then I would think that having a straight deficit each day would be more beneficial.
Does this suggest that, with leaner people, the body may be more "sensitive" to larger deficits, responding to them more quickly?
Responding as in losing fat mass preferentially to LBM? If so, no I don't believe so. Leaner you are the more likely it is that the body will preferentially use LBM as fuel compared to fat. Or sensitive, being that a leaner person is more likely to use LBM as fuel than fat? I think I just wrote the same thing twice :laugh:0 -
damir00: glad I don't do endurance cardioWhere it gets tricky is cal/carb cycling. Having some days of the week at maintenance or surplus and then some larger deficit days has proven anecdotally to work quite well (especially with leaner individuals). If the 31kcal/lb of FM was true then I would think that having a straight deficit each day would be more beneficial.
Does this suggest that, with leaner people, the body may be more "sensitive" to larger deficits, responding to them more quickly?
Responding as in losing fat mass preferentially to LBM? If so, no I don't believe so. Leaner you are the more likely it is that the body will preferentially use LBM as fuel compared to fat. Or sensitive, being that a leaner person is more likely to use LBM as fuel than fat? I think I just wrote the same thing twice :laugh:
As in more apt to lose/burn LBM as a result of larger deficits over time.0 -
im in ...0
-
My personal experience was a modest deficit but with no lifting, inadequate protein (60-85g daily) and running as my primary activity. Over a 7 month span I lost 20.6 lbs with 16.1 lbs coming from fat and 4.6 lbs coming from lean mass. This was all measured by DEXA as a baseline and then 7 months later. My average daily deficit was calculated to be somewhere around 310 calories. I was disappointed with lean mass loss that high, though I can't confirm some of it wasn't water weight since I think I wasn't in the throes of a cut when I took the baseline. I was lifting and recomping at 2300 calories daily (an even smaller deficit) by the time I did the 2nd one.
That is consistent, though, with the first time I lost weight - 60 lbs over a year and lost roughly 13.5 lbs of LBM.
With inadequate protein and the absence of lifting, I seem to lose about 22.5% from LBM of any given loss. Just anecdotal, but thought it was interesting info.
That's actually a pretty good P-ratio there considering the exercise choice. I was expecting closer to 50% LBM loss.
When I lost the majority of weight, I did no formal resistance training, averaged cal deficit of around 1000 initially dropping to 500 by the end. Protein was around 1g/lb of LBM (initial) and I DEFINITELY lost a lot of LBM. No dexa unfortunately (didn't even know what it was then).0 -
**In for reading later**
I had to get out my calculator, I tend to go OVER the stated protein ratio, but I do keep fats at about the stated ratio. I've lost a little bit of muscle, but it's been mainly fat lost in my quest for a better body.
I aim for 150g protein, 50g fat and 75-100g carbs (mainly non-starchy veg) daily. My weight is 62kg (136lb). In my fat loss stage, I kept my calorie deficit at about 500 per day (averaged over the week). It's worked very well for me.0 -
Very interesting discussion to me.
I'm 6'3" and currently at 289 down from a peak weight of approx 350 +/-. Recently did a hydrostatic body comp test and the results showed me at 30.12 bf% with lbm @ 203#'s and fat at 87#'s.
Don't know what my numbers were when I was at 350+ but I guess that my bf% at that time must have exceeded 40% or more.
Was setting goals to get myself back in the 200# range but after this test it has me thinking a better goal would be to concentrate more on lowering bf% down in to the 12-15% range rather than an arbitrary scale #.
What do folk think might be a realistic scenario for a goal. Don't imagine that it is realistic to try and keep all 203#'s of that lbm but it would be great to hold on to as big a % as possible while dumping fat.
I intend to add more strength training in to my repetoire.
Not a lot of formal lifting in routine at the moment but I am constantly lifting heavy stuff on a pretty much regular basis just in my daily activities around our ranch (clearing brush, chainsaw work, cutting trees, tossing logs, etc, not to mention the activities around remodeling and building our house).
Other cardio comes from swimming and water polo.0 -
Very interesting discussion to me.
I'm 6'3" and currently at 289 down from a peak weight of approx 350 +/-. Recently did a hydrostatic body comp test and the results showed me at 30.12 bf% with lbm @ 203#'s and fat at 87#'s.
Don't know what my numbers were when I was at 350+ but I guess that my bf% at that time must have exceeded 40% or more.
Was setting goals to get myself back in the 200# range but after this test it has me thinking a better goal would be to concentrate more on lowering bf% down in to the 12-15% range rather than an arbitrary scale #.
What do folk think might be a realistic scenario for a goal. Don't imagine that it is realistic to try and keep all 203#'s of that lbm but it would be great to hold on to as big a % as possible while dumping fat.
I intend to add more strength training in to my repetoire.
Not a lot of formal lifting in routine at the moment but I am constantly lifting heavy stuff on a pretty much regular basis just in my daily activities around our ranch (clearing brush, chainsaw work, cutting trees, tossing logs, etc, not to mention the activities around remodeling and building our house).
Other cardio comes from swimming and water polo.
My understanding is adequate protein intake in a deficit is more important than weight training specifically, especially if your daily life is very active and includes heavy labor as yours does. If you keep to at least 200g protein daily and a modest deficit of 15-20% of overall TDEE, you should be able to maintain most of that LBM, which will put you MILES ahead of the game once you're at a healthy BF level.0 -
This is a great thread, very informative.
I'm currently cutting down and trying to shed some fat while retaining as much of my current LBM as possible. Since starting two months ago, I've gone up on all of my lifts and some of them significantly. This is all while on a 20% deficit, lifting 4 times a week, and eating around 150-175g of protein daily (current weight of 203 lbs).
Now I've read where you can get stronger, able to lift more, but not actually gain any mass. Is this true? If so how does that work? Seems like some of you folks on here are pretty knowledgeable and might have some ideas.0 -
This is a great thread, very informative.
I'm currently cutting down and trying to shed some fat while retaining as much of my current LBM as possible. Since starting two months ago, I've gone up on all of my lifts and some of them significantly. This is all while on a 20% deficit, lifting 4 times a week, and eating around 150-175g of protein daily (current weight of 203 lbs).
Now I've read where you can get stronger, able to lift more, but not actually gain any mass. Is this true? If so how does that work? Seems like some of you folks on here are pretty knowledgeable and might have some ideas.
Strength gains are neuromuscular adaptations and don't require extra muscle tissue to be built (to an extent) to continue to see gains. So, you can go quite far in strength increases even at a modest deficit. As I understand, you will have an idea max potential for strength at a given level of muscle tissue. After that you'd need new tissue to gain more strength (i.e. the more muscle you have, the stronger you *could* get). But I've seen guys who look super average who pull and squat HUGE weights.
Look at progressive strength training with low reps on your compound lifts.0 -
There's only so much lifting heavy with a surplus of protein can accomplish in sparing lean mass under a semi-starvation diet. In its simplicity, ones starting body fat percentage and magnitude of deficit are two key variables. As mrsbigmack mentioned, Lyle speaks about how initial body fat percentage as a primary determinant in P-ratio in regards to surpluses and deficits. When I did a self-imposed semi-starvation diet years ago, I estimated a loss of 12 lbs fat mass vs 8 lbs lean mass when assuming a 10-week, 1800 net calorie deficit from 3000 maintenance needs.
OMG. You really ARE a geek!
0 -
Very interesting discussion to me.
I'm 6'3" and currently at 289 down from a peak weight of approx 350 +/-. Recently did a hydrostatic body comp test and the results showed me at 30.12 bf% with lbm @ 203#'s and fat at 87#'s.
Don't know what my numbers were when I was at 350+ but I guess that my bf% at that time must have exceeded 40% or more.
Was setting goals to get myself back in the 200# range but after this test it has me thinking a better goal would be to concentrate more on lowering bf% down in to the 12-15% range rather than an arbitrary scale #.
What do folk think might be a realistic scenario for a goal. Don't imagine that it is realistic to try and keep all 203#'s of that lbm but it would be great to hold on to as big a % as possible while dumping fat.
I intend to add more strength training in to my repetoire.
Not a lot of formal lifting in routine at the moment but I am constantly lifting heavy stuff on a pretty much regular basis just in my daily activities around our ranch (clearing brush, chainsaw work, cutting trees, tossing logs, etc, not to mention the activities around remodeling and building our house).
Other cardio comes from swimming and water polo.
My understanding is adequate protein intake in a deficit is more important than weight training specifically, especially if your daily life is very active and includes heavy labor as yours does. If you keep to at least 200g protein daily and a modest deficit of 15-20% of overall TDEE, you should be able to maintain most of that LBM, which will put you MILES ahead of the game once you're at a healthy BF level.
I would disagree with that. I believe that resistance training is more important than getting adequate protein in a deficit for the purpose of LBM retention. (although if you have an active job then that could help a little) My own results had adequate protein throughout but no RT and despite no dexa scan I can assure there was a lot of LBM lost. Took me the last 3-4 years to get it all back again too.
Perfect world, do both and don't worry about it though. (wish I knew that then)0 -
I misread the post.It matters because fat can only be "burned" (converted and used) at a rate of roughly 31.4 calories per pound per day, so even if you are doing other things right if the deficit can't be serviced fast enough using fat then the body has to use other things.0 -
Caloric intake has a direct effect on gym performance. That's why I make sure to drink beer.0
-
TruthThis is a great thread, very informative.
I'm currently cutting down and trying to shed some fat while retaining as much of my current LBM as possible. Since starting two months ago, I've gone up on all of my lifts and some of them significantly. This is all while on a 20% deficit, lifting 4 times a week, and eating around 150-175g of protein daily (current weight of 203 lbs).
Now I've read where you can get stronger, able to lift more, but not actually gain any mass. Is this true? If so how does that work? Seems like some of you folks on here are pretty knowledgeable and might have some ideas.
Strength gains are neuromuscular adaptations and don't require extra muscle tissue to be built (to an extent) to continue to see gains. So, you can go quite far in strength increases even at a modest deficit. As I understand, you will have an idea max potential for strength at a given level of muscle tissue. After that you'd need new tissue to gain more strength (i.e. the more muscle you have, the stronger you *could* get). But I've seen guys who look super average who pull and squat HUGE weights.
Look at progressive strength training with low reps on your compound lifts.0 -
Very interesting discussion to me.
I'm 6'3" and currently at 289 down from a peak weight of approx 350 +/-. Recently did a hydrostatic body comp test and the results showed me at 30.12 bf% with lbm @ 203#'s and fat at 87#'s.
Don't know what my numbers were when I was at 350+ but I guess that my bf% at that time must have exceeded 40% or more.
Was setting goals to get myself back in the 200# range but after this test it has me thinking a better goal would be to concentrate more on lowering bf% down in to the 12-15% range rather than an arbitrary scale #.
What do folk think might be a realistic scenario for a goal. Don't imagine that it is realistic to try and keep all 203#'s of that lbm but it would be great to hold on to as big a % as possible while dumping fat.
I intend to add more strength training in to my repetoire.
Not a lot of formal lifting in routine at the moment but I am constantly lifting heavy stuff on a pretty much regular basis just in my daily activities around our ranch (clearing brush, chainsaw work, cutting trees, tossing logs, etc, not to mention the activities around remodeling and building our house).
Other cardio comes from swimming and water polo.
My understanding is adequate protein intake in a deficit is more important than weight training specifically, especially if your daily life is very active and includes heavy labor as yours does. If you keep to at least 200g protein daily and a modest deficit of 15-20% of overall TDEE, you should be able to maintain most of that LBM, which will put you MILES ahead of the game once you're at a healthy BF level.
I would disagree with that. I believe that resistance training is more important than getting adequate protein in a deficit for the purpose of LBM retention. (although if you have an active job then that could help a little) My own results had adequate protein throughout but no RT and despite no dexa scan I can assure there was a lot of LBM lost. Took me the last 3-4 years to get it all back again too.
Perfect world, do both and don't worry about it though. (wish I knew that then)
I can concede that "more important" was a poor choice of words. What I should have said was "still valuable". Adequate protein alone can negate some of the detrimental effects of caloric deficits e.g. Muscle loss, even in the absence of resistance training.
But yeah, do both
0 -
Bump to read later0
-
One question I have is if/how you can determine how much LBM loss is muscle loss. In my case, I think I lost about 42 pounds of fat and 13 pounds that was not fat. When I post those numbers, I often get jumped on by advocates of slower loss and/or more resistance training that say I lost 13 pounds of muscle. I don't think I did. There are other components of "not fat"; I hesitate to even call that all LBM because I assume water doesn't count as fat. When you lose around a quarter of body weight, some water loss is permanent because you are no longer as large of a vessel.0
-
Thanks for the replies and, yes, I believe that the best course of action will be to increase both resistance work and protein intake.
The hydro body comp test was interesting to me and the data gave me some good insight as well. Before the test I was focusing more on the goal of wanting to get myself down in to the 190-200# range.
In my prime athlete/college days I was around 205# but in top condition from swimming/rowing.
Now with the body comp data showing that there currently is 203#'s of lean mass underneath all the blubber, it makes me realize that maybe that 190-200# range is not the best goal.
Certainly want to lose a good percentage of bf but if I am to maintain a good number of the lean mass than clearly the ultimate weight might be 10 or 15 pounds above 200.
Shows how much the BMI charts are whacked. BMI chart at 6'3" doesn't have me hitting the "healthy" range until I would get under 199#'s. Doing that math, I'd need to lose about 25-30#'s of lean mass along with the fat and have my body fat % down in the 10-15% range. I'm game for working on getting the bf % down, but hopefully that won't mean having to drop 30#'s of lean mass along with the fat in order to hit that level.
Time will tell, I guess.
Curious thing about BMI is that I also noticed that the low end range for "healthy" status on a 6'3" frame is coming in at 149 #'s before dropping in to the "underweight" category.
Holy crap, I'd look like I'd just come out of a POW camp at level.
I would disagree with that. I believe that resistance training is more important than getting adequate protein in a deficit for the purpose of LBM retention. (although if you have an active job then that could help a little) My own results had adequate protein throughout but no RT and despite no dexa scan I can assure there was a lot of LBM lost. Took me the last 3-4 years to get it all back again too.
Perfect world, do both and don't worry about it though. (wish I knew that then)
I can concede that "more important" was a poor choice of words. What I should have said was "still valuable". Adequate protein alone can negate some of the detrimental effects of caloric deficits e.g. Muscle loss, even in the absence of resistance training.
But yeah, do both0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.8K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 396 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 968 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions